HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

All Purpose Luongo Trade Discussion (New news) MOD WARNING IN OP

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-18-2012, 08:49 AM
  #126
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Based on Canucks fans' less than enthusiastic response to this rumor, I get the feeling that Toronto's assets, when compared to those of the other teams rumored in the Luongo Sweepstakes, seem the least appealing to them, especially when Maple Leafs fans are refusing to let go of Rielly/Gardiner/Lupul/Kessel/Phaneuf/Van Riemsdyk.

RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:03 AM
  #127
tempest2i
Feral
 
tempest2i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cowtown
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Yeah, it really mitigates the risk any team trading for Luongo takes on.
Not all of the risk.

For all intents and purposes the end years of Luongo's contract can be viewed the same way it was with the previous CBA. That is, Luongo can still play out whatever part of the contract he wants, retire when he's ready and remove his cap hit from the books of which ever team picks him up. That hasn't changed from the old CBA. The only thing that has changed, with respect to the team that trades for him, is the provision about stashing NHL salary in the minors or overseas to remove the cap hit.

I don't see why his trade value should increase in that situation. Luongo is now worth more because a potential provision of the new CBA includes something that directly punishes the Canucks further down the road? If I'm a team trading for Luongo, that doesn't matter to me and I'm not going to pay a premium now just because provision is there.

tempest2i is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:05 AM
  #128
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Yeah, it really mitigates the risk any team trading for Luongo takes on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
Not all of the risk.

For all intents and purposes the end years of Luongo's contract can be viewed the same way it was with the previous CBA. That is, Luongo can still play out whatever part of the contract he wants, retire when he's ready and remove his cap hit from the books of which ever team picks him up. That hasn't changed from the old CBA. The only thing that has changed, with respect to the team that trades for him, is the provision about stashing NHL salary in the minors or overseas to remove the cap hit.
+1

People need to understand this. The proposed CBA revisions DO NOT affect the team trading for a contract like Luongo's one bit. It's the EXACT same to them as it would have been with the old CBA.

Responsible for both Luongo's cap hit and salary up until the point that he retires. If he doesn't want to retire, that means you could be holding onto that cap-hit several years after his play has significantly declined.

416Leafer is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:11 AM
  #129
RECsGuy*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
For all intents and purposes the end years of Luongo's contract can be viewed the same way it was with the previous CBA. That is, Luongo can still play out whatever part of the contract he wants, retire when he's ready and remove his cap hit from the books of which ever team picks him up. That hasn't changed from the old CBA. The only thing that has changed, with respect to the team that trades for him, is the provision about stashing NHL salary in the minors or overseas to remove the cap hit.

I don't see why his trade value should increase in that situation. Luongo is now worth more because a potential provision of the new CBA includes something that directly punishes the Canucks further down the road? If I'm a team trading for Luongo, that doesn't matter to me and I'm not going to pay a premium now just because provision is there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
+1

People need to understand this. The proposed CBA revisions DO NOT affect the team trading for a contract like Luongo's one bit. It's the EXACT same to them as it would have been with the old CBA.

Responsible for both Luongo's cap hit and salary up until the point that he retires. If he doesn't want to retire, that means you could be holding onto that cap-hit several years after his play has significantly declined.
Canucks fans SWEAR Luongo won't play out his contract. Don't bother telling them otherwise.

RECsGuy* is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:17 AM
  #130
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 49,032
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlmightyPO View Post
I see two of Kadri, Colborne, Franson, MacArthur and Kulemin as the roster players who would be in play. Doubt Burke trades the 1st, but a 2nd, and a lesser prospect (like Percy) probably would also be added.

To me I think I wouldn't bother making a trade if value is any higher then:

Kadri + MaC/Franson + Ashton/2nd+Percy
or
Kadri+Kulemin+2nd for Lu and Raymond
That would be horrible. I would much rather deal Luongo elsewhere if this is what's being offered. Neither of these trades address any of our needs.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:21 AM
  #131
416Leafer
Registered User
 
416Leafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
Canucks fans SWEAR Luongo won't play out his contract. Don't bother telling them otherwise.
Then they should have no problems with the proposed changes to the CBA

416Leafer is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:23 AM
  #132
Vankiller Whale
Bow down
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,841
vCash: 1508
Quote:
Originally Posted by tempest2i View Post
Not all of the risk.

For all intents and purposes the end years of Luongo's contract can be viewed the same way it was with the previous CBA. That is, Luongo can still play out whatever part of the contract he wants, retire when he's ready and remove his cap hit from the books of which ever team picks him up. That hasn't changed from the old CBA. The only thing that has changed, with respect to the team that trades for him, is the provision about stashing NHL salary in the minors or overseas to remove the cap hit.

I don't see why his trade value should increase in that situation. Luongo is now worth more because a potential provision of the new CBA includes something that directly punishes the Canucks further down the road? If I'm a team trading for Luongo, that doesn't matter to me and I'm not going to pay a premium now just because provision is there.
Well, at least his HF value should go up. Everyone was telling us the CBA would make it so Luongo's contract would be on the books for the team that trades for him no matter what.

In 6-7 years from now there's a few possible scenarios.

1) Luongo retires.
2) Luongo still wants to play, but understanding his play no longer lives up to his contract, he agrees to go to a cap floor team to play the veteran backup.
3) Luongo doesn't want to retire, and want's to stay in Toronto/wherever instead of going somewhere else(like Florida) to spend the rest of his career. The team can threaten to put him in the minors, which would probably make him change his mind, so unless he'd rather play in the minors than Florida in 6-7 years from now, I don't think it will be much of a problem.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:24 AM
  #133
racerjoe
Registered User
 
racerjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 416Leafer View Post
+1

People need to understand this. The proposed CBA revisions DO NOT affect the team trading for a contract like Luongo's one bit. It's the EXACT same to them as it would have been with the old CBA.

Responsible for both Luongo's cap hit and salary up until the point that he retires. If he doesn't want to retire, that means you could be holding onto that cap-hit several years after his play has significantly declined.
This isn't directed at you, but many fans of other teams can't have it both ways.

They were telling us before this was a bad deal even if he retired early, as with the new CBA they could be stuck with the cap hit, and so on. Now many are saying it changes nothing. They can only have it one way.

I agree to someone like Burke, this probably means very little, to Tallon Trading for cap space may be interesting, and who knows for anyone else.

But to HF posters, this should raise the value.

racerjoe is online now  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:31 AM
  #134
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
That would be horrible. I would much rather deal Luongo elsewhere if this is what's being offered. Neither of these trades address any of our needs.
While I'm not a fan of the players that were offered, I don't see many combinations of teams that need a goaltender who can fit Luongo under a potentially reduced salary cap, especially if the new CBA precludes burying his later years in the minors for cap relief.

In fact, I'm hard-pressed to think of any other team besides Toronto where the math and longer term need match-up. In Florida, for example, if some of the common tools for burying/trading an aged player with a sizable cap hit AND team control of prospects is extended, why would they not just go with Markstrom for free? Furthermore, by trading cap space, they could actually end up with MORE than Luongo gains them.

The more restrictive the CBA becomes with salary cap tricks, the harder it becomes for Luongo to return even modest value.

Broad Street Elite is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:32 AM
  #135
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,315
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
That would be horrible. I would much rather deal Luongo elsewhere if this is what's being offered. Neither of these trades address any of our needs.
The reality is Luongo is unlikely to address our needs specifically this season. I definitely feel a first needs to be apart of the return unless Lupul is involved. That and Kadri builds our woefully shallow prospect pool and may produce replacements when the inevitable end to the Sedin/Kesler era comes. Personally, I would love Lupul but cannot see any scenario where the Leafs move him. With Kesler out until January, I wouldn't mind Connolly coming back. In fact, I may push for that, especially if we can dump Raymond.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:34 AM
  #136
Liferleafer
Blow it up!
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ag925 View Post
Based on Canucks fans' less than enthusiastic response to this rumor, I get the feeling that Toronto's assets, when compared to those of the other teams rumored in the Luongo Sweepstakes, seem the least appealing to them, especially when Maple Leafs fans are refusing to let go of Rielly/Gardiner/Lupul/Kessel/Phaneuf/Van Riemsdyk.
Does anyone other than Nuck's fans actually think the Leafs SHOULD deal any of these guys....i mean come on.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:37 AM
  #137
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,315
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Does anyone other than Nuck's fans actually think the Leafs SHOULD deal any of these guys....i mean come on.
I'm a Nuck fan and think you'd be crazy moving them but hey. I won't complain if it happens.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:39 AM
  #138
Vankiller Whale
Bow down
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,841
vCash: 1508
Gardiner or JVR is about the most I'd expect. I doubt they get traded, but I don't think it's out of the realm of reality.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:39 AM
  #139
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 49,032
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
Does anyone other than Nuck's fans actually think the Leafs SHOULD deal any of these guys....i mean come on.
Well if not then the Leafs SHOULD enjoy missing the playoffs due to bad goaltending again. We aren't going to just give you a star player for spare parts like Calgary did.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:42 AM
  #140
Liferleafer
Blow it up!
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Well if not then the Leafs SHOULD enjoy missing the playoffs due to bad goaltending again. We aren't going to just give you a star player for spare parts like Calgary did.
No worries...if the cost is any of Kessel/Phaneuf/Rielly/Gards/JVR or Lupul you can respectfully keep Luongo.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:44 AM
  #141
Liferleafer
Blow it up!
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
I'm a Nuck fan and think you'd be crazy moving them but hey. I won't complain if it happens.
I wouldn't complain if Kesler was coming here either....but alas....

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:47 AM
  #142
birddog*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucbourdon View Post
Also



This is getting interesting, But wait...Read this.



Suddenly Luongo's trade value just went up again.

Interesting stuff today.
It didn't go up. Prior to the new proposed change -- if Luongo retired no team was responsible for the cap hit. Because Vancouver is now responsible does not make him more attractive to the Leafs.

Also, it's doubtful players will agree to this and I am surprised the NHL wanted this in there.

birddog* is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:48 AM
  #143
Vankiller Whale
Bow down
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,841
vCash: 1508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
I wouldn't complain if Kesler was coming here either....but alas....
Ah. Kessel + Grabovski for Luongo + Kesler....

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:50 AM
  #144
birddog*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I think with the addition of Rielly,I would think Gardiner becomes a little expendable, I don't see him as untouchable as he was before the draft.
With that logic -- one of the Sedins is expendable -- since they are similar players.

Burle won't trade his young guns. Kadri is probably the only possibility in terms of young players.

birddog* is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:50 AM
  #145
Liferleafer
Blow it up!
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Ah. Kessel + Grabovski for Luongo + Kesler....
Ahh...no.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:51 AM
  #146
YouCantYandleThis*
Moustache Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by birddog View Post
With that logic -- one of the Sedins is expendable -- since they are similar players.

Burle won't trade his young guns. Kadri is probably the only possibility in terms of young players.
Feel like explaining this one to me? Am I missing something?

YouCantYandleThis* is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:52 AM
  #147
Liferleafer
Blow it up!
 
Liferleafer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 11,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YouCantYandleThis View Post
Feel like explaining this one to me? Am I missing something?
He was responding to a post that said because we now have Reilly, Gardiner should be expendable as they are similar players.

Liferleafer is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:53 AM
  #148
YouCantYandleThis*
Moustache Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer View Post
He was responding to a post that said because we now have Reilly, Gardiner should be expendable as they are similar players.
Absolutely in no way similar situations.

But yeah, fair enough

YouCantYandleThis* is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:53 AM
  #149
ChillyPalmer
Registered User
 
ChillyPalmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Well if not then the Leafs SHOULD enjoy missing the playoffs due to bad goaltending again. We aren't going to just give you a star player for spare parts like Calgary did.
lol, you guys get awfully sensitive when no one wants your superstar goalie.

No more trading the future just to make the playoffs. Goal is to win it all. Love, love the guy, but Lu couldn't win the cup with the Cancuks, and he's gonna lead the Leafs there? Even harder when we have to give up core pieces just to get him.

Do no want.

ChillyPalmer is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 09:54 AM
  #150
YouCantYandleThis*
Moustache Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,368
vCash: 500
"Reimer is gonna take us to the promised land!"

Has a nice ring to it. Scrivens, not so much.

YouCantYandleThis* is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:19 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.